Supreme Court hears arguments in Erlanger v. United States over ACCAdifferent-occasions clause and who decides prior-offense facts

The Supreme Court on oral argument examined whether the Armed Career Criminal Act(ACCA) requires a jury, not a judge, to decide whether a defendant's prior offenses occurred on "different occasions," a factual determination that can trigger a mandatory enhancement.

Counsel for the petitioner, identified in argument as Mister Fisher, told the justices that "the Apprendi rule directly applies" to any offense-related conduct beyond the elements of a prior conviction and urged the Court to reverse the court of appeals. Fisher described bifurcation—having a separate jury proceeding on the enhancement questionas a well-established remedy to avoid prejudice and said it would be workable in the relatively small number of ACCA cases each year.

The Solicitor General's office, represented by counsel identified as Mister Fagan, pressed a view that the ACCA ‘‘different occasions’’ inquiry is a multifactored factual question invoking timing, geographic proximity and the nature of…